BCG prep after McKinsey rejection after R2

Although preparation is similar, BCG’s interviews tend to be more interviewee-led, requiring candidates to take initiative and actively drive the case discussion. In contrast, McKinsey’s process is generally more structured and hypothesis-driven. The fit interview at BCG also adopts a more conversational approach, making rapport-building and demonstrating one’s personality important aspects. To succeed, candidates should emphasize flexibility in structuring cases, proactively lead problem-solving efforts, and remain agile in their thinking rather than adhering strictly to a predetermined framework. BCG values creativity, the consideration of multiple solution paths, and pragmatic approaches; therefore, displaying both structured and adaptable reasoning will be advantageous.

Regarding Fit interview preparation, that follows a different format than mckinsey. There are more potential questions you may receive and they way to prepare them is different (shorter, but more flexible regarding their content). Happy to discuss this as Fit / PEI preparation is one of my key strengths.

First of all, I’m really sorry to hear about your experience — getting that far at McKinsey is already an achievement and a strong signal of your potential. It’s completely normal to feel disappointed after such focused preparation, but the fact that you received clear feedback and were encouraged to reapply shows you are already very close. I know of many candidates that succeeded at BCG after interviews at other top consultancies, so you're absolutely still on track.

How to approach your preparation this time
Based on the feedback, I’d focus on two areas:

1. Structuring under pressure: go beyond memorized frameworks and practice flexible, hypothesis-driven structures. Use short prompts, time constraints, and varied case types to simulate pressure.
2. Stamina & mental consistency: since fatigue impacted your McKinsey R2, build endurance by doing occasional back-to-back mock interviews so that the real interview day feels more manageable.

How BCG interviews differ from McKinsey’s
BCG tends to use less guided, more open-ended cases. You’ll often have to create the structure from scratch, navigate more quantitative elements, and show creativity in problem-solving. The discussions can feel more conversational than McKinsey’s format.

Specific focus areas to prioritize for BCG

• Structure: broad, MECE, tailored to the objective.
• Creative idea generation: BCG frequently tests creative thinking.
• Math and chart interpretation: Be prepared for a more data-heavy interview.
• Step-by-step synthesis: not only at the end but throughout the case.

About the logical assessment
BCG’s online assessment is generally logic- and reasoning-focused. Expect pattern recognition, deductive reasoning, and business-style logic puzzles. It’s not heavily math-based, though quick mental arithmetic is helpful.

It sucks to fall short at Round 2, especially when you know exhaustion played a role. That McK same-day schedule is brutal and is absolutely designed to test stamina. You have the single hardest component of the application—the PEI—locked down as "flawless," so take a deep breath. You are a top-tier candidate; you just need to refine your strategic toolkit.

Your failure wasn't due to the quantity of your 100 drills, but the quality of the application. The partner feedback is critical: you need to move past standard, textbook frameworks and demonstrate the business intuition needed to identify the key value levers. This means stopping the case, thinking like an executive, and creating a bespoke structure that prioritizes only the variables that actually move the needle for the client, not just listing every possible bucket.

For your BCG prep, this pivot in thinking is exactly what you need, as BCG interviews are structurally different from McKinsey's. BCG cases are notoriously more strategic, ambiguous, and candidate-led. They are less focused on finding a root cause (McK style) and more focused on forward-looking strategy: "What should this company do next?"

1. Stop isolated structuring drills. Spend your time doing full, highly ambiguous cases where you are forced to synthesize data on the fly.

2. Focus on Framework Innovation. BCG loves seeing you build a structure from scratch based on the context, rather than modifying a 3C or 4P model. When you present your framework, always prioritize the three most critical levers you will investigate and explain why you chose them.

3. The Logical Assessment: This is typically a digital aptitude test focusing on data sufficiency, chart interpretation, and quantitative reasoning—think a mix of GMAT data problems and sharp mental math, but often under severe time pressure. It is used as a hard filter before you even meet the human interviewers. Treat it seriously; it requires high speed and accuracy.

You have the foundation. Now, you need to transition from being a good test-taker to a credible strategic thought partner. All the best for BCG.

There isn't much of a difference. 

It's great that you got this far. Congrats! And I know it probably feels bitter that the last round didn't work out. 

I wouldn't be so quick though to diagnose you failing the second round as just being tired. (needless to say, feel free to ignore what I'm saying because I only know your situation based on this brief message you wrote and I'm just trying to correlate it to my experience as a coach having worked with a sample of around 400 candidates). Often, when candidates get good, they can be great at one case and not good at all at the next one. That's typically when their skill level hasn't stabilised. That could also explain what happened in your case. 

I would definitely work on the feedback provided by the McK Partners. 

I would also get exposed to more 'candidate-led' cases, to get used to being more proactive as the candidate working through the case. 

And lastly, I would try to apply to more jobs. Even if you did so well on McK, and you have BCG in 3 months, and you're ready to put in all this effort, BCG might still not work out (because for instance you wake up with a sore throat on interview day). So it's best to diversify your risk a bit more and have several options that you can rely on. 

Feel free to reach out if you have any specific questions.

Best,
Cristian

Hi!

Here is what I strongly believe from what you describe:

What happened in your McKinsey interview wasn’t a failure. It was a diagnostic.
It revealed the exact limits of your current system.

Most candidates treat rejection emotionally.
The smart ones treat it analytically.
Because behind every collapse under pressure is a pattern that can be rebuilt stronger than before.

MBB interviews don’t fall apart at the level of knowledge.
They fall apart at the level of stability.

Your structuring may be solid on a fresh mind.
Your logic may be sharp when you are relaxed.
Your communication may be great when the case behaves.

But the partner round does not measure your “best”.
It measures your baseline under stress.

And that baseline is exactly what kept you from crossing the finish line.

The real goal over the next three months:
Build a version of yourself that performs at a high level even on a bad day.
A version that does not depend on mood, luck, adrenaline, or perfect conditions.

This is where most candidates go wrong.
They fix symptoms.
They drill more frameworks.
They add more drills.
They read more cases.

But robustness isn’t built through volume.
It is built through calibrated stress exposure.

Three things that will change the game for you:

One. Automatic structure.
You need thinking that locks into place even when your brain is foggy.
Not fancy templates.
Just clean logic that doesn’t degrade under pressure.

Two. Endurance.
Your mind needs to stay sharp from the first minute to the last.
This is why candidates break in Round 2.
Their technique is fine.
Their stamina isn’t.

Three. Recovery mechanisms.
One misstep shouldn’t trigger a downward spiral.
Elite candidates are great at rapid resets.
They correct the trajectory mid case.
That is why they look “calm” when others melt.

Success at this level isn’t about being the smartest.
It is about being the most repeatable.
The most stable.
The most unshakeable when the room gets heavy.

If I were you, I would get myself the best personal guidance for building this robustness. You won't get this from the usual resources you find on Google. Do some research on different preparation systems, and choose one that consistently delivers MBB offers, week after week. 

Hope this helps!
Sidi

___________________

Dr. Sidi S. Koné

Hi there,

Sorry to hear of your McKinsey rejection after putting so much effort. 

Good thing is for BCG prep, a lot of the fundamentals are similar to McKinsey. You still need structured problem-solving, clear communication, and strong case synthesis. Since structuring was a weak spot for you, I would prioritize practicing frameworks, breaking down problems clearly, and identifying the key business levers quickly. I suggest you working with several coaches to really get down to which area of structuring you need to improve on specifically.

BCG cases are interviewee-led and often more hypothesis-driven and focused on creativity or market sizing. My suggestion is to focus on doing live cases to practice leading the case.

hey!

There is a difference between McKinsey and BCG interviews. BCG cases are more interviewee-led, the types of cases you get can vary more, and personal fit questions tend to be tougher and less structured than at McKinsey. Focus on being confident in your problem structuring, hypothesis-driven thinking, and storytelling. For the logical assessment in Round 1, it’s mostly about reasoning and basic numerical logic, not just math. Prep should be very targeted, practice cases under timed conditions and refine your structuring until it feels automatic.

Let me know if you need help! Happy to get you into BCG! :)

best, Alessa :)